Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 204
- 1
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Anyone watch the Roadster demo last night? As expected, it had some peak Elon cringe moments, but you don't have to be a great MC when you have a flying car.
Possibly the greatest product demo of all time.
Super cool, but I am afraid it'd be the same as with jetpacks - the tech exists for a while now but it's not practically usable outside of flashy demos.
The practical use for it is extreme maneuverability to avoid accidents.
I think once we get the robots driving for us, the accidents will plummet dramatically, to the point where an occasional collision will be reported by the news as a sensational event revealing the dangers of modern technology the wider public is blissfully unaware of. I don't have hard data on hand, but my conviction is the large majority of accidents is caused by someone being stupid on the road.
Me too. Waymo is getting in about 20% as many crashes as humans do. They claim a disproportionate number of the remaining crashes are not-at-fault, but they're a biased source.
There was a story a while ago about a robotaxi hitting a kid outside a school. A more charitable summary would be that its superhuman reflexes saved a jaywalker from more serious injuries. Repeat that same reporting slant a hundred times, and it's hard to get a good picture from the news.
Instead, consider an (obviously flawed) model where all collisions involve two vehicles: one at fault and one not. You can drop your accident rate by 50% by following the rules, and the last 30% would have to be from supererogatory actions like dodging bad drivers. From that, I suspect that an all-Waymo city would be even safer than a Waymo in a mixed-vehicle city.
More options
Context Copy link
I follow a dash cam channel on YouTube and, yes, while there are occasional black swan, no-one-could-have-seen-that-coming events, the vast majority of them come down to one or more drivers being inattentive, distracted, or just plain foolish.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link